Error
  • JUser::_load: Unable to load user with id: 67

Featured Articles

TSMC: Volume production of 16nm FinFET in 2H 2015

TSMC: Volume production of 16nm FinFET in 2H 2015

TSMC has announced that it will begin volume production of 16nm FinFET products in the second half of 2015, in late…

More...
AMD misses earnings targets, announces layoffs

AMD misses earnings targets, announces layoffs

AMD has missed earnings targets and is planning a substantial job cuts. The company reported quarterly earnings yesterday and the street is…

More...
Did Google botch the Nexus 6 and Nexus 9?

Did Google botch the Nexus 6 and Nexus 9?

As expected, Google has finally released the eagerly awaited Nexus 6 phablet and its first 64-bit device, the Nexus 9 tablet.

More...
Gainward GTX 970 Phantom previewed

Gainward GTX 970 Phantom previewed

Nvidia has released two new graphics cards based on its latest Maxwell GPU architecture. The Geforce GTX 970 and Geforce GTX…

More...
EVGA GTX 970 SC ACX 2.0 reviewed

EVGA GTX 970 SC ACX 2.0 reviewed

Nvidia has released two new graphics cards based on its latest Maxwell GPU architecture. The Geforce GTX 970 and Geforce GTX…

More...
Frontpage Slideshow | Copyright © 2006-2010 orks, a business unit of Nuevvo Webware Ltd.
Tuesday, 20 March 2007 17:08

Blades drawn between IBM and HP

Written by
Image

IBM counter strikes


IBM has attacked HP over claims that its blade servers ran colder than those made by Big Blue.

 
HP released laboratory-based research which it claimed its BladeSystem c-Class used up to 27 per cent less power than the IBM BladeCenter-H in similar configurations.

 
However today IBM said that HP's report made the dubious claim that IBM's use of expansion boards for additional memory cost too much and the HP BladeSystem with ProLiant BL460c significantly outperforms the IBM BladeCenter-H with HS21.

 
An IBM spokesman said that the IBM configuration gave clients greater flexibility and functionality, however it is not likely that a client would be running both.

 
Fewer than 10 per cent of its customers use these expansion options and very few would choose both, making the test unrealistic and not at all real-world, as HP claimed, said IBM.

 
It added that HP’s results were otherwise only showing them as having a 27 percent advantage on this configuration, that validates IBM testing stating IBM is up to 24 percent more energy efficient than HP.

 
It added that the test did not use up to date products in its testing and that "If HP had tested BladeCenter with the current code, IBM is confident it would have resulted in clear IBM leadership in power efficiency per blade."

 

More at Techworld, here.


 

Last modified on Tuesday, 20 March 2007 14:20
blog comments powered by Disqus

 

Facebook activity

Latest Commented Articles

Recent Comments